The maharani cannot be seen, because she is behind curtains

Patrick McDevitt made the point that for both the fut 15 coins ruling classes of the princely states and the British military establishment in India, the game of polo developed into a “central marker of the masculine ethos thought to be necessary to defend the imperial status quo in the face of increasingly strident calls for reform and independence.”11 However, rather than viewing the Indian aristocracy as a parallel and equal hierarchy to the British aristocracy, it would be more accurate to characterize it as mimetic but inferior.12 The Indian potentates indulged in polo because it was a way to emphasize their power and eminently aristocratic social standing , not because it might be a path to becoming more British. Although this fra- ternity could not overcome deeply entrenched British racism and attitudes of cultural supe- riority, at least within the polo community, there was an equality of opportunity and fair competition. Nevertheless, the camaraderie usually ended with the game’s last bell. Indians, including some who had been received by royalty, were not allowed in most of the British Army regimental messes.

The caste system and centuries-honored rules of conduct did not permit Indian women, especially Muslims, to mix socially with other races. The custom known as purdah (curtain), which confined females to certain areas of homes and palaces, virtually made impossible any meaningful social contact with foreigners and other Indians. Strict purdah was also observed overseas. There is a photograph of the Maharani of Jodhpur watching a polo game at Roe- hampton Club from her automobile in the 1920s. The maharani cannot be seen, because she is behind curtains. The car’s chauffer is a woman, and the Rolls Royce’s Spirit of Ecstasy mas- cot on the radiator has been replaced by Jodhpur’s eagle.


British regiments serving their tour of duty in India were not immune to some prob- lems. In 1902, two troopers in the 9th Lancers beat to death an Indian cook . When a court of inquiry failed to identif y the culprits, one of the victim’s relatives appealed directly to the viceroy, Lord Curzon. The viceroy, appalled at the regiment’s callousness, mandated an exten- sive investigation that, again, was unable to identif y the murderers. Lord Curzon punished the whole regiment. Officers on leave were recalled to duty. Other rank s on furlough were called back and extra sentry duties were mandated. Furthermore, regimental leave was denied for six months.14 Curzon’s courageous action provoked wide consternation among the Army and the British community in India . The waves reached England. In the House of Commons the Hon. Heneage Legge, a former 9th Lancers commanding officer, rose to protest the col- lective punishment. Nevertheless, at the 1902 Delhi Durbar honoring Edward’s VII corona- tion, the British spectators, including some in the viceregal staff, cheered as the regiment paraded in the course of the celebrations.